Related
Dear all,
I am absolutely looking for a cable headphone remote control for my Blackstone. The E100 headset does not work and I do not want to use a bluetooth headset as I want to avoid as much radiation as possible.
Do you know a compatible headset with remote control for the music player?
Thanks!
What you are looking for doesn't exist, and you could have really searched this forum before asking this question.
And you are kidding about the radiation thing, aren't you?
vangrieg said:
What you are looking for doesn't exist, and you could have really searched this forum before asking this question.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, does anyone know, if HTC is going to release something like that?
vangrieg said:
And you are kidding about the radiation thing, aren't you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Certainly I'm not. The Federal Ministry of Health have published a paper in collaboration with some universities, showing that the daily radiation that we are exposed to, provokes health damages. Well, I think, that's nothing suprising - and we are exposed to radiation all day - so, in my opinion, we should reduce it as much as possible.
That's why I am really angry that there is no such thing as a cable remote control, as it exists (E100) but not usable with the expensive Touch HD. So where's the problem? Why not making it compatible with the Touch HD? I do not see any reason.
The problem is lack of audio in the extUSB jack. It's all going to a much easier marketed 3.5 one.
lamajstro said:
Certainly I'm not. The Federal Ministry of Health have published a paper in collaboration with some universities, showing that the daily radiation that we are exposed to, provokes health damages. Well, I think, that's nothing suprising - and we are exposed to radiation all day - so, in my opinion, we should reduce it as much as possible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't want to start a flame war, but just by carrying a phone you're exposing yourself to several times more radiation than a bluetooth headset could possibly emit. Here's a quick article on BusinessWeek:
But because it's a good idea to err on the side of caution in such matters, regulatory bodies have set exposure standards. These are expressed in terms of the "specific absorption rate" (SAR), which attempts to measure the radiation actually reaching body tissue. The U.S. and Canadian governments have set a maximum SAR of 1.6 watts per kilogram, while the European Union permits a slightly higher level.
"INSIGNIFICANT BY COMPARISON." In the real world, emissions generally stay well below the maximum allowed. According to data from BlackBerry-maker Research in Motion (RIMM ), SARs for GSM BlackBerry devices (those sold by Cingular and T-Mobile in the U.S.) fall in the range of 0.25 watts per kilogram when used at your ear.
Bluetooth radios operate at much lower power levels than phones so, not surprisingly, the radiation added by a Bluetooth headset is insignificant by comparison. A study by William G. Scanlon of Queen's University in Belfast found that a typical Ericsson (ERICY ) Bluetooth radio module generates an SAR of just 0.001 watts per kilogram.
So, if you're worried about the health impact of radio waves, remember that the phone itself is a much greater source of concern than a Bluetooth headset. That's especially true because, when you're using Bluetooth, the BlackBerry is likely positioned much farther from your body -- and especially your brain -- than when holding the phone up to your ear.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are bluetooth units with available that hang around your neck and into which you plug your headphones, like this Jabra unit. This would mean that the only radiation is at your chest and not next to your brain. Perhaps that might be a solution?
SiliconS said:
I don't want to start a flame war, but just by carrying a phone you're exposing yourself to several times more radiation than a bluetooth headset could possibly emit. Here's a quick article on BusinessWeek:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No problem, thanks for the link. Well, I'm aware of that and I know that we are exposed to radiation even if I go by train. But: You do not have to expose yourself to even more radiation if it is not really necessary and not making it possible to use the E100 cable rc is not necessary!
SiliconS said:
There are bluetooth units with available that hang around your neck and into which you plug your headphones, like this Jabra unit. This would mean that the only radiation is at your chest and not next to your brain. Perhaps that might be a solution?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, I've seen this one. But same problem. I really would prefer a cable rc.
I thought, perhaps it is just a software issue, that the sound is sent to the 3,5mm jack...
regardless of radiation that and wifi this and stardust that
the only thing certain in life that needs no amount of academia to prove or disprove is.......
once you hit 25 you are dying and its a non stop slide into oblivion
ooo ps:
here in the UK a little while back, some academic scare mongering types published a paper that "proved" wired headsets INCREASED the exposure to the radiation our fones emit
then again, its academia that have set up a (broken) experiment under the alps that with either do nothing or create a black hole ending the world and its surrounds
go figure?!?!
the outcome of such research, changes and contradicts itself so frequently (and depending on who is actually funding it) that all bar what is common sense (eat well, dont do "poisons" (drink and drugs) exercise etc), is pretty worthless
ive been such a researcher so i know most of its twaddle, ive generated some of it!
Hi,
I want to buy an Atrix but have concerns about SAR rates. I may buy the Atrix or the 4g one but I have a question about it.
Under UMTS I 2100 frequency, is there a difference between SAR values of Atrix and the 4g Atrix?
Also, may I find a chart like the one attached?
Thanks in advance...
I don't know about that... It seems like the SAR value are not so popular anymore - people and manufacturers don't really seem to care about them anymore.
In any case, here's one point... You get irradiated even without using a mobile phone, because wireless networks are basically everywhere around us... One extra bit of a radiation punch in your body (from your phone) isn't really gonna hurt. But that's just me...
I honestly feel that the SAR are completely irrelevant. I'll put it this way, the sun is orders of magnitude more dangerous than your cell phone. quick physics explanations, electromagnetic waves as most know range from radio to gamma waves. These waves are not continuous like most believe instead comprised of individual photons. The power rating for radio is essentially the energy of the photons times the number of photons. So quick example say some source of radio waves produces 4 photons a sec each with one joule. The power output would be 4watts in that case. Lets also say a source of visible light produces one photon per second that has 4 joules of power. This would also be rated at 4 watts.
So think of it this way lets say you get hit with 100 foam dodge balls. it might hard but the force is distributed so it's not that bad. Now lets say you get hit with a bullet which has the same force as the 100 dodge balls. But how which one will you die from the bullet or 100 foam dodge balls.
This is analogous to the radio ways produced by your phone. it is essentially impossible for radio waves to cause damage to your body. Visible light form the sun is orders of magnitude stronger than anything your cell phone or a radio tower could produce
jonnyboyC13 said:
I honestly feel that the SAR are completely irrelevant. I'll put it this way, the sun is orders of magnitude more dangerous than your cell phone. quick physics explanations, electromagnetic waves as most know range from radio to gamma waves. These waves are not continuous like most believe instead comprised of individual photons. The power rating for radio is essentially the energy of the photons times the number of photons. So quick example say some source of radio waves produces 4 photons a sec each with one joule. The power output would be 4watts in that case. Lets also say a source of visible light produces one photon per second that has 4 joules of power. This would also be rated at 4 watts.
So think of it this way lets say you get hit with 100 foam dodge balls. it might hard but the force is distributed so it's not that bad. Now lets say you get hit with a bullet which has the same force as the 100 dodge balls. But how which one will you die from the bullet or 100 foam dodge balls.
This is analogous to the radio ways produced by your phone. it is essentially impossible for radio waves to cause damage to your body. Visible light form the sun is orders of magnitude stronger than anything your cell phone or a radio tower could produce
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It makes sense, but... why is there so much fuss regarding this? I mean, if it is that simple... why do scientists still argue on this? Either for the media, either they're not actually scientists, either... well, it's not that simple... right?
Seriously, if you are not using your phone in low reception location. There is nothing to worry about.
Formhault said:
It makes sense, but... why is there so much fuss regarding this? I mean, if it is that simple... why do scientists still argue on this? Either for the media, either they're not actually scientists, either... well, it's not that simple... right
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My opinion? Fear-mongering, ignorance of science, and the media's constant hunger to feed its 24/7 news cycle. Combine that with a tendency to distort, overstate, or understate the facts (gotta sensationalize in order to draw in the idiot viewers), and you end up with mass confusion and unwarranted panic over the issues, particularly issues where science is involved.
windozeanti said:
Seriously, if you are not using your phone in low reception location. There is nothing to worry about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When the signal is low, the phone is going to do anything just to sip some network, even kill you with radiation, lol.
Sent from my Neutrino-loaded ATRIX
Introductory:
Hello all, cell phones produce radiation just in case you did not know. These radiation levels are measured in a value called SAR(Specific Absorbtion Rate) and it literally is the measurement of just the bottom line of what the human body absorbs, rather than just the amount that it radiating(ha, get it?) around the device. Radiation is bad in the human body where it is directly related to certain issues, including directly reducing bone density in the body. I am posting this as an accurate informational thread where you can draw your own conclusions based off of facts.
SAR Levels:
SAR, which stands for Specific Absorbtion Rate, levels fluctuate depending on numerous factors, in which we must go over in order to accurately understand. The key thing to understand is that the further the device is from your body, the levels begin to diminish by the milimeter(mm).
For a phone to receive an FCC certification, the device cannot have a SAR level of more than 1.6 watts per kilogram in the US, and 2.0 in Europe.
Galaxy Note Series Tests by Samsung:
Let's take a look at the Note series in order to keep this sequential and easier to remember from a timeline fashion of perspective. The Galaxy Note 1 was released first(obviously) and is the model number SGH-I717 for reference. Taken from Samsung's website directly, here are the Note 1 results, including the way that they perform their own measurements:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
You can see in this writing the methods that are used for testing, and that the body specific SAR tests have the device at 1.0 centimeters(CM), equivalent to 10 millimeters(mm) away. Keep this in mind and we'll touch up on this later.
And here are the Note 2 specific values:
And here are the Note 3 specific values:
So as you can see the comparisons above, the Note 3 effectively produces 153% more Head SAR than the Note 2, and 196% more Head SAR than the Note 1!
I would calculate the Body SAR differences but we have a big problem with Samsung's specific tests...they test these values with the device 1.0 CM(or 10mm) away from the body. This Body SAR calculation is useless to you if your phone presses against your body at 0 mm away!
Let's think...why would Samsung measure in this fashion at 1.0 CM away? Well the Note 3 produces 1.28 Body SAR at 1.0 cm away, so the big question is what would it produce at 0 mm away/ AKA in your pants pocket? Maybe it would exceed the FCC limitation of 1.6?
CNET Testing:
Now let's take a look at a recent test performed by CNET on 1/16/14 to see what they have found in differences in the Note series in particular:
The above is literally all of the information they posted where it is tough to tell how the test was performed and/or what body part it was performed against. By comparing the numbers, it seems as though they tested the head only since it matches the Head SAR values by Samsung.
But there is only but one main discrepency...the Note 3 reads 0.63 SAR value by Samsung, while CNET tested it at 0.9 SAR. Which one holds true?
Device Model Top Charts:
As you can see in the following results, our devices do not hold the highest SAR values compared to the worst out there *ehem* Motorola!
And here are the lowest SAR values amonst all devices. Keep in mind how the Note 2 is 4th lowest.
Theorycrafting:
I researched more into studies being performed per the distance of an object from humans and have found some interesting results.
Here is a model of the human head for reference, spefical model for SAR testing:
And here is are one test's results from testing the SAR levels after altering different distances:
This is just me tipping the iceberg to not go on and on.
Shifting gears toward current events, check out 2/14/14's event of the Army buying 7,000 Note 2's for its troops HERE
The reason why I feel that this is relevant is that they definitely would not want to have their troops being exposed to radiation levels higher than other devices. What makes more sense though is that they tested it for quite some time before it was rolled out, but who knows?
General Radiation Reduction Techniques:
-Consider a cell phone radiation reduction case, Google Pong research to get started since I'm probably not allowed to post links
-Consider buying a device with low SAR levels
-Keep the device out of your pocket or anywhere where it is directly against your skin. Even a hip holster might help keep it a few cm away, or carry it in a purse/backpack.
-Use speakerphone as often as possible to keep the device far from your head.
-Devices use the most radiation when beggining and ending calls. Pull the phone away from your head, even if just a few centimeters, when beginning and ending calls.
-Devices also use high radiation when "hunting for a signal". This occurs when your device has no signal, and needs to omit more power consistently to find one. So keep it away at these times.
-Bluetooth uses less radiation, but overall can be more damage from keeping it on your head for long periods of time. LOSE THE BLUETOOTH!
-Text instead of calling whenever it is applicable/feasible
-Don't sleep with the device near your head....think about it, 6+ hours of it so close to your head...
-Last things I wanted to mention are beefing up on certain things you eat.
a.) Eat seaweed, it's very powerful against radiation
b.) Look for natural supplements that particularly repair already damaged cells in your body from radiation. They are alpha lipoic acid and vitamins C and E...BUT ONLY IF YOU DON'T GET THESE FROM NATURAL DIET
Conclusion:
Considering all of the above along with knowing that we are the guinea pigs for long term cell phone radiation, I strongly feel that it's best to consider SAR levels when purchasing a device. The SAR levels are obviously increasing with each new model being released and should be monitored closely.
It seems to show as being a factor toward brain tumors and bone density loss in only 1 of 2 legs in people(where they always kept their cell phone in the same pocket). I did not go much into detail here about these particular researches/tests, but I would recommend to now start looking into the tests performed for "decade-long cell phone radiation exposures". Imagine us after 50 years of exposure, and please feel free to comment here.
Your voice and opinions matter in this world, and you should speak up since you have a right to your own opinions, and I will respect it no matter what. While I don't really know the true effects of the radiation, my opinion is that I'm open minded so I'll keep the cell away from my body to be safe. I will post this across multiple forums that it belongs in and moderators, please let me know if I happen to post this in a forbidden section. Don't censor truth, and let the thread live.
Thank you for your time reading all of this and I hope it helps. If so, please rate the thread 5 stars and hit Thanks solely to promote the spreading of the word.
Thanks for this write-up. I use a headset or speakerphone whenever possible. One of my classmates happens to have written a paper on this topic so the fear has already been instilled in me.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
reserved
bigmiketn said:
Thanks for this write-up. I use a headset or speakerphone whenever possible. One of my classmates happens to have written a paper on this topic so the fear has already been instilled in me.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're welcome, I'm honored to be one to bring it your attention for your well being!
Oh and I just added a poll if you'd guys like to vote.
Thread cleaned of off topic banter that strays from the development plight. Move along if you have nothing to contribute.
This is a great thread. I really love that you have brought this to attention cause I will place my phone far from my body and not use it unless I have an emergency not related to my Facebook posts.
Sent from my SM-N900V using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
I have been doing more research into this. And I'll be honest, it worked me more and more. My kids sleep with cell phone by there head, I charge mine and my wife's next to mine. I have started to make sure we all put our phones in airplane mode while we sleep. I don't know if there's fear mongering going on, but I'm fearful. The internet usually has conflicted articles, but on this subject it seems to be way, way one-sided toward cell damage and such. I love my cell phone and its many uses a whole lot and hate to know (think) it may be harming my family and me. Sorry about the long rant.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
From what I've read, the cellular antennas for the Note 3 are at the bottom of the phone. See linked image from anandtech: http://images.anandtech.com/doci/7376/Screen Shot 2013-09-30 at 3.39.26 PM_575px.png - from article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7376/samsung-galaxy-note-3-review/7
I've always held most of my phones, while talking, from the bottom corners and resting the earpiece against my ear. Now with this phone I try to hold it from the top, near my head, and let the bottom part curve outward - about 3-4cm from my mouth.
So if anything with the Note 3 we're radiating our lips? And those of us who hold our phone from the bottom - our fingers.
Just having our cellphones 20mm (2cm) further from our bodies halves the SAR radiation. Then is it safe to assume that using this phone is better than most because the cellular antenna is located at the bottom of the phone which sits (at least for me 3-4cm from my face). So I'm getting 4x less radiation than the listed .9 rating?
That said, I rarely use this phone for calling, so during WiFi usage (which is when I'm using it mostly) my hands are at the bottom - maybe 2-3cm from the WiFi radio - and I'm not sure if WiFi is as harmful or not vs cellular?
BigMcGuire said:
From what I've read, the cellular antennas for the Note 3 are at the bottom of the phone. See linked image from anandtech: http://images.anandtech.com/doci/7376/Screen Shot 2013-09-30 at 3.39.26 PM_575px.png - from article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7376/samsung-galaxy-note-3-review/7
I've always held most of my phones, while talking, from the bottom corners and resting the earpiece against my ear. Now with this phone I try to hold it from the top, near my head, and let the bottom part curve outward - about 3-4cm from my mouth.
So if anything with the Note 3 we're radiating our lips? And those of us who hold our phone from the bottom - our fingers.
Just having our cellphones 20mm (2cm) further from our bodies halves the SAR radiation. Then is it safe to assume that using this phone is better than most because the cellular antenna is located at the bottom of the phone which sits (at least for me 3-4cm from my face). So I'm getting 4x less radiation than the listed .9 rating?
That said, I rarely use this phone for calling, so during WiFi usage (which is when I'm using it mostly) my hands are at the bottom - maybe 2-3cm from the WiFi radio - and I'm not sure if WiFi is as harmful or not vs cellular?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great information, thanks for sharing this. When Samsung performs their tests, they test Head and Body SAR at "normal operating position" which I would assume is the device hugging your cheek. It's really tough to gauge the amount of radiation deduction from keeping it further from your head, but is logical to assume that it is much, much less radiation by keeping it a few CM away from your face...and I would say that this is good practice to not have to worry and relax if you do indeed do that.
WiFi is a whole other debatable topic, where the debate is that it is hurting children especially since their skulls are thinner while it is developing.
Moderator clearly didn't agree with my comment earlier, so decided to censor it. No curse words, was on topic... I think this is nonsense, the subject of this propaganda post in general. If you think your cell phone is going to kill you, maybe it was your time.
makeshiftharmony said:
I have been doing more research into this. And I'll be honest, it worked me more and more. My kids sleep with cell phone by there head, I charge mine and my wife's next to mine. I have started to make sure we all put our phones in airplane mode while we sleep. I don't know if there's fear mongering going on, but I'm fearful. The internet usually has conflicted articles, but on this subject it seems to be way, way one-sided toward cell damage and such. I love my cell phone and its many uses a whole lot and hate to know (think) it may be harming my family and me. Sorry about the long rant.
Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
BigMcGuire said:
From what I've read, the cellular antennas for the Note 3 are at the bottom of the phone. See linked image from anandtech: http://images.anandtech.com/doci/7376/Screen Shot 2013-09-30 at 3.39.26 PM_575px.png - from article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7376/samsung-galaxy-note-3-review/7
I've always held most of my phones, while talking, from the bottom corners and resting the earpiece against my ear. Now with this phone I try to hold it from the top, near my head, and let the bottom part curve outward - about 3-4cm from my mouth.
So if anything with the Note 3 we're radiating our lips? And those of us who hold our phone from the bottom - our fingers.
Just having our cellphones 20mm (2cm) further from our bodies halves the SAR radiation. Then is it safe to assume that using this phone is better than most because the cellular antenna is located at the bottom of the phone which sits (at least for me 3-4cm from my face). So I'm getting 4x less radiation than the listed .9 rating?
That said, I rarely use this phone for calling, so during WiFi usage (which is when I'm using it mostly) my hands are at the bottom - maybe 2-3cm from the WiFi radio - and I'm not sure if WiFi is as harmful or not vs cellular?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good advice here, I'd rather be safe than sorry if possible. This whole post has made me think differently on how I use my phone. Thanks for the info.
Introductory:
Hello all, cell phones produce radiation just in case you did not know. These radiation levels are measured in a value called SAR(Specific Absorbtion Rate) and it literally is the measurement of just the bottom line of what the human body absorbs, rather than just the amount that it radiating(ha, get it?) around the device. Radiation is bad in the human body where it is directly related to certain issues, including directly reducing bone density in the body. I am posting this as an accurate informational thread where you can draw your own conclusions based off of facts.
SAR Levels:
SAR, which stands for Specific Absorbtion Rate, levels fluctuate depending on numerous factors, in which we must go over in order to accurately understand. The key thing to understand is that the further the device is from your body, the levels begin to diminish by the milimeter(mm).
For a phone to receive an FCC certification, the device cannot have a SAR level of more than 1.6 watts per kilogram in the US, and 2.0 in Europe.
Galaxy Note Series Tests by Samsung:
Let's take a look at the Note series in order to keep this sequential and easier to remember from a timeline fashion of perspective. The Galaxy Note 1 was released first(obviously) and is the model number SGH-I717 for reference. Taken from Samsung's website directly, here are the Note 1 results, including the way that they perform their own measurements:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
You can see in this writing the methods that are used for testing, and that the body specific SAR tests have the device at 1.0 centimeters(CM), equivalent to 10 millimeters(mm) away. Keep this in mind and we'll touch up on this later.
And here are the Note 2 specific values:
And here are the Note 3 specific values:
So as you can see the comparisons above, the Note 3 effectively produces 153% more Head SAR than the Note 2, and 196% more Head SAR than the Note 1!
I would calculate the Body SAR differences but we have a big problem with Samsung's specific tests...they test these values with the device 1.0 CM(or 10mm) away from the body. This Body SAR calculation is useless to you if your phone presses against your body at 0 mm away!
Let's think...why would Samsung measure in this fashion at 1.0 CM away? Well the Note 3 produces 1.28 Body SAR at 1.0 cm away, so the big question is what would it produce at 0 mm away/ AKA in your pants pocket? Maybe it would exceed the FCC limitation of 1.6?
CNET Testing:
Now let's take a look at a recent test performed by CNET on 1/16/14 to see what they have found in differences in the Note series in particular:
The above is literally all of the information they posted where it is tough to tell how the test was performed and/or what body part it was performed against. By comparing the numbers, it seems as though they tested the head only since it matches the Head SAR values by Samsung.
But there is only but one main discrepency...the Note 3 reads 0.63 SAR value by Samsung, while CNET tested it at 0.9 SAR. Which one holds true?
Device Model Top Charts:
As you can see in the following results, our devices do not hold the highest SAR values compared to the worst out there *ehem* Motorola!
And here are the lowest SAR values amonst all devices. Keep in mind how the Note 2 is 4th lowest.
Theorycrafting:
I researched more into studies being performed per the distance of an object from humans and have found some interesting results.
Here is a model of the human head for reference, spefical model for SAR testing:
And here is are one test's results from testing the SAR levels after altering different distances:
This is just me tipping the iceberg to not go on and on.
Shifting gears toward current events, check out 2/14/14's event of the Army buying 7,000 Note 2's for its troops HERE
The reason why I feel that this is relevant is that they definitely would not want to have their troops being exposed to radiation levels higher than other devices. What makes more sense though is that they tested it for quite some time before it was rolled out, but who knows?
General Radiation Reduction Techniques:
-Consider a cell phone radiation reduction case, Google Pong research to get started since I'm probably not allowed to post links
-Consider buying a device with low SAR levels
-Keep the device out of your pocket or anywhere where it is directly against your skin. Even a hip holster might help keep it a few cm away, or carry it in a purse/backpack.
-Use speakerphone as often as possible to keep the device far from your head.
-Devices use the most radiation when beggining and ending calls. Pull the phone away from your head, even if just a few centimeters, when beginning and ending calls.
-Devices also use high radiation when "hunting for a signal". This occurs when your device has no signal, and needs to omit more power consistently to find one. So keep it away at these times.
-Bluetooth uses less radiation, but overall can be more damage from keeping it on your head for long periods of time. LOSE THE BLUETOOTH!
-Text instead of calling whenever it is applicable/feasible
-Don't sleep with the device near your head....think about it, 6+ hours of it so close to your head...
-Last things I wanted to mention are beefing up on certain things you eat.
a.) Eat seaweed, it's very powerful against radiation
b.) Look for natural supplements that particularly repair already damaged cells in your body from radiation. They are alpha lipoic acid and vitamins C and E...BUT ONLY IF YOU DON'T GET THESE FROM NATURAL DIET
Conclusion:
Considering all of the above along with knowing that we are the guinea pigs for long term cell phone radiation, I strongly feel that it's best to consider SAR levels when purchasing a device. The SAR levels are obviously increasing with each new model being released and should be monitored closely.
It seems to show as being a factor toward brain tumors and bone density loss in only 1 of 2 legs in people(where they always kept their cell phone in the same pocket). I did not go much into detail here about these particular researches/tests, but I would recommend to now start looking into the tests performed for "decade-long cell phone radiation exposures". Imagine us after 50 years of exposure, and please feel free to comment here.
Your voice and opinions matter in this world, and you should speak up since you have a right to your own opinions, and I will respect it no matter what. While I don't really know the true effects of the radiation, my opinion is that I'm open minded so I'll keep the cell away from my body to be safe. I will post this across multiple forums that it belongs in and moderators, please let me know if I happen to post this in a forbidden section. Don't censor truth, and let the thread live.
Thank you for your time reading all of this and I hope it helps. If so, please rate the thread 5 stars and hit Thanks solely to promote the spreading of the word.
Wow! That's a lot of info. F*** it! We are all gonna die from some sort of cancer. It is what it is. Well at least I will have my Note 3 to communicate with everyone and let them know how I am gonna die.
Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk
JonSCSL said:
Wow! That's a lot of info. F*** it! We all are gonna die from some sort of cancer. It is what it is. Well at least I will have my Note 3 to communicate with everyone and let them know how I am gonna die.
Sent from my SM-N900P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I proudly support and encourage this attitude.
It's a phone, I use the heck out of it for talking (bluetooth, though), and won't change that one jot.
Sent from my SM-N900P using Xparent BlueTapatalk 2
I co-sign with that attitude, no one will live for ever so why not enjoy the time you have!
I just want to point out that the information you're presenting is referring to non-ionizing radiation. Technically speaking, the visible light given off by the LED is electromagnetic "radiation" as well. As innocuous as light seems, it can be harmful in certain situations: UV light can cause skin damage, blue light may contribute to vision problem like macular degeneration, use of cell phones at night (such as lying in bed) can disrupt circadian rhythms which has a whole host of secondary health effects.
My point is, the radiation you're talking about is electrons moving. It's not the kind of radiation that comes from an X-ray, or a linear acceleration, or a dirty bomb, or the fallout from nuclear detonations, etc. Those kinds of radiation, ionizing radiation, pose serious health risks.
I'm not saying there are no negative health effects from the EM radiation cell phones produce, but no one should confuse the potential for harm with the well-established harmful effects of ionizing radiation. I'm of the personal opinion that the amount of EM put off by a cell phone poses much less harm to our bodies than a modern lifestyle: sedentary, poor nutrition, toxic chemicals in the environment, air pollution, etc. etc.
Truth be told, if the FCC would let us get away with it, I would have no problem cranking up the power of the antenna in order to get better signal.
People worry way too much about stuff. Use your phone like a phone. By the time your radiation exposure is high enough to be of concern, you will have been dead for a long time. Please dont encourage people to use speaker phone as often as possible, its already bad enough that we have to hear one side of the conversation of people who feel they have to yell into the phone right by their face.
BTW. Samsung doesnt test at 1cm, the FCC does.It's a standardized test that is part of the approval process. And, its very unlikely that the Army chose the Note 2 due to radiation levels....
I for one thank you for providing this information. FCC, FDA and the Government alike are all trying to kill us so I will defiantly heed your warning and will think twice about taking a call. I do not want any type of cancer and I would like to see my children and my grandchildren. I know one day I will die but we should not be paying Samsung or any OEM to kill us slowly like we pay the Government, Pharmaceuticals, and our jobs that we give our life to so that day will come sooner. You idiots sound like r-tards. Use your freaking brain, wake the f* up people!
hey guys,, so i'm looking forward to buying this xperia z2 from a guy that i met on facebook..for 38k (in my country's currency)..he says that it's a genuin phone but i'm not sure coz i don't really know the guy..so plz help me to find out if it's a genuin z2..i had a z1 before and i hard bricked it (i know i'm a genius).and thats why i really need this phone..so please help me to find out wthr its FAKE or NOT.(coz i dnt wnt to end up buying a clone)
deleted
lookup firmware version on settings->about and try updating the phone
connect it to a pc that has Sony PC companion and the software should recognize the phone as Sony Xperia Z2 (D6503/D6502)
also check the body of the phone see if its intact whether it looks like its been opened before or not
also test the weight of the phone on a weighing scale and check if it is exactly 163 g (5.75 oz) without screen protector i guess
check the internet for photos of Xperia Z2 the color you are buying and check the phone with the photos if they look like the same thats it
it is very unlikely to open z2 replace hardware and reassemble it you cant get away with that it will most definitely leave a mark
+ check the waterproof ability (coz thats important)
There are multiple ways of checking whether it's a genuine phone.
First of all waterproofness. You can check that by testing pressure sensor. Just Google for it and you will know how to do it.
Another thing is that the device model should be d6503/2, but this one may get faked easily.
So test the pictures. Take some picture in manual mode (20mpx) and check the resolution. The resolution should be over 5000x3000 and at least 5MB.
Under right flap there's additional information about the phone, you just have to pull it out.
Anyway, there are so many ways to check whether the phone is genuine.
If you only get an opportunity to hold it in your hand you will notice it.
But for me the waterproofness test (with pressure sensor) would be the main deal breaker. Fake phones aren't waterproof (or don't have pressure sensor).
Sent from Xperia Z2
Luckily not from an iPhone = Yesterdays technology at tomorrows prices
Zspitter said:
lookup firmware version on settings->about and try updating the phone
connect it to a pc that has Sony PC companion and the software should recognize the phone as Sony Xperia Z2 (D6503/D6502)
also check the body of the phone see if its intact whether it looks like its been opened before or not
also test the weight of the phone on a weighing scale and check if it is exactly 163 g (5.75 oz) without screen protector i guess
check the internet for photos of Xperia Z2 the color you are buying and check the phone with the photos if they look like the same thats it
it is very unlikely to open z2 replace hardware and reassemble it you cant get away with that it will most definitely leave a mark
+ check the waterproof ability (coz thats important)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you very much
mr.loverlover said:
There are multiple ways of checking whether it's a genuine phone.
First of all waterproofness. You can check that by testing pressure sensor. Just Google for it and you will know how to do it.
Another thing is that the device model should be d6503/2, but this one may get faked easily.
So test the pictures. Take some picture in manual mode (20mpx) and check the resolution. The resolution should be over 5000x3000 and at least 5MB.
Under right flap there's additional information about the phone, you just have to pull it out.
Anyway, there are so many ways to check whether the phone is genuine.
If you only get an opportunity to hold it in your hand you will notice it.
But for me the waterproofness test (with pressure sensor) would be the main deal breaker. Fake phones aren't waterproof (or don't have pressure sensor).
Sent from Xperia Z2
Luckily not from an iPhone = Yesterdays technology at tomorrows prices
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is pressure sensor an app?? if it is i have to install that on the z2 and check the pressure i guess..is there a standard pressure limit or amount of pressure that should exist in z2?? (Sorry to bother u..googled it but not so sure what to do)
superdroid xtereme said:
Is pressure sensor an app?? if it is i have to install that on the z2 and check the pressure i guess..is there a standard pressure limit or amount of pressure that should exist in z2?? (Sorry to bother u..googled it but not so sure what to do)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NO need to install anything.
On the device, goto the phone app and type *#*#7378423#*#*
A new app will open. Go to Service Tests, and look for Pressure Sensor.
Make sure all flaps are closed. Apply pressure to the touch screen of the phone. If the device is air tight, the values on the screen should go up a bit, then fall to the starting values. If you stop applying pressure, the values should change again. If it does this, then it is air tight, and that also means it is water tight.
D395267 said:
NO need to install anything.
On the device, goto the phone app and type *#*#7378423#*#*
A new app will open. Go to Service Tests, and look for Pressure Sensor.
Make sure all flaps are closed. Apply pressure to the touch screen of the phone. If the device is air tight, the values on the screen should go up a bit, then fall to the starting values. If you stop applying pressure, the values should change again. If it does this, then it is air tight, and that also means it is water tight.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can i make sure that it's bootloader was never unlocked???i don't want loose drm keys due to camera problem..
superdroid xtereme said:
How can i make sure that it's bootloader was never unlocked???i don't want loose drm keys due to camera problem..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whilst in the Service Menu, goto Service Tests, Security.
If the bootloader has never been unlocked, then it should show a bunch of lines of text, each ending with [Key OK][Active].
If the bootloader was relocked by restoring the TA image, then it should show the same thing as above.
If the bootloader was relocked without restoring the TA image, or is still currently unlocked, then it should be different from above.